Monday, October 07, 2013

Bishop James White on the Book of James: His Juvenile "Challenge" Will be Met

By Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong

Facebook friend L Niall Quinn recently
directed my attention to one of Bishop White's innumerable hit pieces
against me: one of his Dividing Line webcasts.
This show was dated 2-19-08, and in it, he was mocking, ridiculing,
constantly laughing and yucking it up like a drunk middle schooler,
playing clips of the songs Liar (Three Dog Night) and Honesty (Billy
Joel) and just having a grand old time conveying 5,390,712 ways to his
fawning audience what an idiot, imbecile, and all-around ignoramus I
supposedly am.

This is his normal modus operandi, folks. If he
didn't act like an insufferably pompous, condescending ass when he
deals with Catholics (and almost above all, with me), he wouldn't be
James White: the Grand Poobah and Imperial Wizard of all Anti-Catholics. White was "critiquing" (if we can call it that) a
radio interview I did on 2-15-08, on the Spirit Morning Show, with
Bruce and Kris McGregor. It was mostly about my book, The One-Minute Apologist. He played little clips of my comments (provided by equally
vitriolic anti-Catholic James Swan, who is on record stating that I am a "psychotic"), and then proceeded to ridicule and mock them, in his
inimitable, obnoxiously juvenile "style".

Around the 20 minute mark,
he went after some comments I made on James 2. Here is what he says:

I don't know how long I spent, writing the chapter on James 2 in The God Who Justifies. . . . I've never seen a meaningful refutation or
even an attempted refutation of that chapter . . . and I'll tell you one
thing. Dave will call this mocking. This isn't mocking; this is a
simple fact. That man is not up to even trying. He doesn't have the
skills; he doesn't have the background; he doesn't have the training; . .
. Roman Catholic apologists . . . don't keep up with what anyone
else is saying, who's providing a response to them . . .

Right. White was ranting about how we Catholic apologists don't read
his books or bother to refute them, and allegedly don't interact with
our best opponents, generally (of course he assumes that he is among
those "best"). That's news to me. I guess that's why I wrote, Pillars of Sola Scriptura, which examined in great depth the two men that
Protestants consider the best historic defenders of sola Scriptura:
William Whitaker (1548-1595) -- White wrote that he was one of "a few
godly servants of the truth have invested the time and effort necessary
to produce for God's people a full-orbed defense of Scriptural
sufficiency" -- and William Goode (1801-1868). These guys are considered
(including by White and his anti-Catholic cronies) the cream of the
crop. I did a 310-page book in response to them, citing them massively.

I guess that's
why his two big buddies, David T. King and William Webster (supposedly,
profound Protestant apologists), have never responded to any of the
several in-depth critiques I have done of their "work." King has been
smarting since way back in 2002, when I blew out of the water his contention (yawn, zzzz) that Pope St. Pius X thought Blessed Cardinal Newman was a theological liberal, who espoused evolution of dogma rather
than development of doctrine. Once I produced a letter from that
saintly pope to the contrary, that was all over, and King -- clearly
embarrassed, since he had been saying on a discussion board that
Catholics were so stupid for not knowing that Newman was heterodox --
has utterly ignored me ever since (except for vehement insults).

I replied to
Webster's historically absurd arguments at great length in 2000 and in 2003. I've never heard a peep from him, ever. Zero, zilch, nada.

It's all, you see, because I want to ignore my best opponents. White
talks about how his books are ignored by Catholics. Well, as of yet, I
see no Protestants champing at the bit to come and refute any of these
books of mine, nor a book that is a direct assault on one of the sacred
pillars of Protestantism: my 100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura. So two can play at that game.

I ignore White and his books, for the most part, because he has shown
himself an intellectual coward for now 18 years since I have encountered
him. He ran from our first lengthy "postal debate" (leaving my final 36
pages of reply completely unanswered, as they remain to this day).

He split from a live chat in his own chat room (Dec. 2000), about Mariology, where I had no notes and talked spontaneously with him,
because one of his Reformed apologist underlings gave up in the debate that had been
carefully planned (leaving halfway through it).
We were going along, and I started answering all his questions, and
asking him some difficult ones, and all of a sudden he had "technical
problems," disappeared and was never heard from again, while I stayed in
his own room for another 90 minutes chatting with folks.

He consistently refused further live chats. He has refused to go more than one round in any written encounters we have had, from 1995 up to the present.
His usual method is to offer some halfway rational critique of
something I wrote, then I reply point-by-point, refuting his stuff, at
which point he completely ignores my counter-reply and descends to
mockery and lying about both my argument and my abilities. See many many
papers about White on my "Anti-Catholicism" page.

This has been his record, and why I don't waste much time on him, and
why virtually no one else of note in the Catholic apologetics world does
anymore, either. He has forfeited his "right" to be taken seriously by
anyone, because of these dual characteristics: his intellectual
cowardice and his insufferably insulting and asinine behavior with
almost all of those he disagrees with. No one has time for that anymore.

But I am happy to make an exception to my usual rule of ignoring
anti-Catholic polemics (in place since 2007). White thinks I ignore
anti-Catholics now because I am so deathly afraid of their profound,
sublime arguments. Let him think what he will. I'll be happy to take on a
chapter of his book, just as I have taken on entire books written by
Calvin, Goode, Whitaker, and other Protestant apologists. I saw a copy
of his screed for 34 cents on amazon. That seemed about right. Perhaps someone could send me an e-book text if they have one, so I can cut-and-paste his comments.
Remember White's words: "That man [yours truly] is not up to even
trying [to refute his chapter on James 2]. He doesn't have the skills;
he doesn't have the background; he doesn't have the training . . ."

All the more reason for the silliness of White's running from my
critiques of his illogical utterly incoherent garbage for 18 years now.
He's got the Master's degree (from Fuller Theological Seminary) and the illegitimate
"doctorate" from an unaccredited school [see analyses on that: one / two / three].
What's he so scared of? I don't have any theological degrees or formal
training in that field (plenty of informal training and hundreds of
books read over 35 years).

Will he even reply to my critique?
Probably not, but if he does, almost certainly he'll follow his
universal past record: respond once in a pseudo-scholarly, semi-behaved
manner, engaging in his usual obfuscation, cynical selectivity, and sophistry.
I'll then respond to that and he'll either utterly ignore it, simply
repeat what I just refuted, again, or start in with the wholesale
mocking and jerkdom, just like what we heard in this pathetic, embarrassing Dividing Line show.

Mark my words. I've had 18 years of experience with the man. It's always been the same. He never changes.

1 comment:

So Mr. White is convinced that he has made an irrefutable "logical" argument that when James writes "one is justified by works and not by faith alone" what he really means is "one is justified by faith alone, and not by works." Does anyone want to work his way through that mess of sophistry? I'll pass.

Is Bishop White still flashing that phony PhD and claiming to be a Greek scholar? Just because someone occasionally misconstrues a few sentences or a paragraph of the Greek New Testament with the dubious assistance of a lexicon and some third-rate book of Greek grammar "rules" (like Mounce) doesn't make him a Greek scholar. Anyone can do that.

--- Marcus Grodi (director of The Coming Home Network, and host of the EWTN television show: The Journey Home)

I highly recommend his work, A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, which I find to be thoroughly orthodox, well-written, and effective for the purpose of making Catholic truth more understandable and accessible to the public at large.

God bless you in your indefatigable labors on behalf of the Faith! Only God knows how many lives your efforts have touched with the truth. . . . God bless you and give you joy and strength in persevering in your important ministry.

There is someone out there who says what I have to say much better than I ever could -- the smartest Catholic apologist I know of -- Dave Armstrong.

--- Amy Welborn (Catholic author and blogmaster)

I love your books, love your site, love everything you do. God bless you in your work. I'm very grateful for all you've done, and for all you make available. If someone pitches a hard question at me, I go first to your site. Then I send the questioner directly to the page that best answers the question. I know it's going to be on your site.

--- Mike Aquilina (Catholic apologist and author of several books)

People regularly tell me how much they appreciate your work. This new book sounds very useful. Your website is incredible and I recommend it regularly to new Catholics.

--- Al Kresta (Host of Kresta in the Afternoon [EWTN], author of Why Do Catholics Genuflect? and other books)

Dave Armstrong's book A Biblical Defense of Catholicism was one of the first Catholic apologetics books that I read when I was exploring Catholicism. Ever since then, I have continued to appreciate how he articulates the Catholic Faith through his blog and books. I still visit his site when I need a great quote or clarification regarding anything . . . Dave is one of the best cyber-apologists out there.--- Dr. Taylor Marshall (apologist and author of The Crucified Rabbi)

I love how Dave makes so much use of the Scriptures in his arguments, showing that the Bible is fully compatible with Catholicism, even more plausibly so than it is with Protestantism.. . . Dave is the hardest working Catholic apologist I know. He is an inspiration to me.

--- Devin Rose (apologist and author of The Protestant's Dilemma, 28 May 2012 and 30 Aug. 2013)Dave Armstrong['s] website is an amazing treasure trove representing hours–yea a lifetime of material gathered to defend Catholic doctrine. Over the years Dave has gathered the evidence for Catholic teaching from just about every source imaginable. He has the strength not only to understand the Catholic faith, but to understand the subtleties and arguments of his Protestant opponents.--- Fr. Dwight Longenecker (author and prominent blogmaster, 6-29-12)

You are a very friendly adversary who really does try to do all things with gentleness and respect. For this I praise God.--- Nathan Rinne (Lutheran apologist [LC-MS] )

You are one of the most thoughtful and careful apologists out there.

Dave, I disagree with you a lot, but you're honorable and gentlemanly, and you really care about truth. Also, I often learn from you, even with regard to my own field. [1-7-14]

--- Dr. Edwin W. Tait (Anglican Church historian)

Dave Armstrong writes me really nice letters when I ask questions. . . . Really, his notes to me are always first class and very respectful and helpful. . . . Dave Armstrong has continued to answer my questions in respectful and helpful ways. I thank the Lord for him.

--- The late Michael Spencer (evangelical Protestant), aka "The Internet Monk", on the Boar's Head Tavern site, 27 and 29 September 2007

Dave Armstrong is a former Protestant Catholic who is in fact blessedly free of the kind of "any enemy of Protestantism is a friend of mine" coalition-building . . . he's pro-Catholic (naturally) without being anti-Protestant (or anti-Orthodox, for that matter).

---"CPA": Lutheran professor of history [seehis site]: unsolicited remarks of 12 July 2005

Dave is basically the reason why I am the knowledgeable and passionate Catholic I am today. When I first decided in college to learn more about my Catholic faith, I read all of the tracts at Catholic Answers ... but then I needed more. I needed to move beyond the basics. Dave was the only one who had what I needed. I poured over his various dialogues and debates and found the answers to even the most obscure questions. His work showed me that there really is an answer to every conceivable question of and objection to the Catholic faith. That was a revelation for me, and it is one I will never forget. My own apologetical style (giving point-by-point rebuttals, relying heavily on Scripture, and being as thorough as possible) is influenced very heavily by his, and to this day I continue to learn and grow a great deal through his work explaining and defending the Catholic faith.

--- Nicholas Hardesty (DRE and apologist, 28 May 2015)

Dave has been a full-time apologist for years. He’s done much good for thousands of people.

You have a lot of good things to say, and you're industrious. Your content often is great. You've done yeoman work over the decades, and many more people [should] profit from your writing. They need what you have to say.

I know you spend countless hours writing about and defending the Church. There may not be any American apologist who puts in more labor than you. You've been a hard-working laborer in the vineyard for a long time.

I like the way you present your stuff Dave ... 99% of the time.--- Protestant Dave Scott, 4-22-14 on my personal Facebook page.

Who is this Dave Armstrong? What is he really like? Well, he is affable, gentle, sweet, easily pleased, very appreciative, and affectionate . . . I was totally unprepared for the real guy. He's a teddy bear, cuddly and sweet. Doesn't interrupt, sits quietly and respectfully as his wife and/or another woman speaks at length. Doesn't dominate the conversation. Just pleasantly, cheerfully enjoys whatever is going on about him at the moment and lovingly affirms those in his presence. Most of the time he has a relaxed, sweet smile.

--- Becky Mayhew (Catholic), 9 May 2009, on the Coming Home Network Forum, after meeting me in person.

Every so often, I recommend great apostolates, websites, etc. And I am very careful to recommend only the very best that are entirely Catholic and in union with the Church. Dave Armstrong’s Biblical Evidence for Catholicism site is one of those. It is a veritable treasure chest of information. Dave is thorough in his research, relentlessly orthodox, and very easy to read.

Discussions with you are always a pleasure, agreeing or disagreeing; that is a rarity these days.

--- David Hemlock (Eastern Orthodox Christian), 4 November 2014.

What I've appreciated, Dave, is that you can both dish out and take argumentative points without taking things personally. Very few people can do that on the Internet. I appreciate hard-hitting debate that isn't taken personally.

--- Dr. Lydia McGrew (Anglican), 12 November 2014.

Dave Armstrong is a friend of mine with whom I've had many discussions. He is a prolific Catholic writer and apologist. If you want to know what the Catholic Church really believes, Dave is a good choice. Dave and I have our disagreements, but I'll put my arm around him and consider him a brother. There is too much dishonesty among all sides in stating what the "other side" believes. I'll respect someone who states fairly what the other believes.

--- Richard Olsen (Evangelical Protestant), 26 November 2012.

Dave writes a powerful message out of deep conviction and careful study. I strongly recommend the reading of his books. While not all readers will find it possible to agree with all his conclusions, every reader will gain much insight from reading carefully a well-crafted view that may be different from their own.

--- Jerome Smith (Evangelical Protestant and editor of The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge), 26 May 2015 on LinkedIn.

I think it's really inspirational, Dave, that you pursue your passion and calling in this way, understanding that it's financially difficult, but making it work anyway. You and I don't agree, but I have to respect the choice as opposed to being some sort of corporate sell out that may make decent money but lives without purpose. You can tell your grandkids what you did with your life, whereas some corporate VP will say that he helped drive a quarterly stock price up briefly and who cares? It's cool to see.

Recommended Catholic Apologetics Links and Icons

Protestantism: Critical Reflections of an Ecumenical Catholic

Orthodoxy & Citation Permission

To the best of my knowledge, all of my theological writing is "orthodox" and not contrary to the official dogmatic and magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church. In the event of any (unintentional) doctrinal or moral error on my part having been undeniably demonstrated to be contrary to the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church, I will gladly and wholeheartedly submit to the authority and wisdom of the Church (Matthew 28:18-20; 1 Timothy 3:15).

All material contained herein is written by Dave Armstrong (all rights reserved) unless otherwise noted. Please retain full copyright, URL, and author information when downloading and/or forwarding this material to others. This information is intended for educational, spiritual enrichment, recreational, non-profitpurposes only, and is not to be exchanged for monetary compensation under any circumstances (Exodus 20:15-16).